|
On January 16 2013 02:19 Roffles wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2013 02:14 zulu_nation8 wrote:On January 16 2013 02:02 AsmodeusXI wrote:On January 16 2013 01:34 zulu_nation8 wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On January 16 2013 00:25 justiceknight wrote:saw this on Westdoor's stream regarding TPS.Mistake's words regarding Jiji became a sub,any1 can translate? pic + Show Spoiler + In short, he read jiji's post as that jiji stepped down because all of the fanboy chatter got to him, but jiji explicitly said that losing confidence was more because of teammates. Lillballz talks about how dangerous the spin/chatter/shittalk by fans of esports can be in general. Not sure what the right terminology is, but the voices of fans can be and is damaging in every sport to its players. Players are also especially close to their fans in esports, and esports fans may even be more nasty with their opinions than the average sports fan. I feel like it's a fan's duty to maintain a certain sense of respect for players as an homage to basic human decency. No matter how badly a pro player performs, they devoted a huge deal of time to the game we all love. I'm sure that in every situation, no one wants the player to perform well more than himself. Now's a good time as any to bring up the topic of criticizing pro players. In the BW days, whenever someone got stomped on stream during a PL match, it was as entertaining to see as a team getting destroyed in league. But one big difference I notice is that BW fans were much more aware of the skill gap between someone who could play a Korean televised BW game and the average BW player, much more so than the regular LoL fan has the same awareness, and respect for the skill gap between him and pro LoL players. I feel that, the culture of LoL fanboyism is that of an amateur one. The commentators only provide basic analysis. An overwhelming portion of league players do not play to improve. But the game is made in such a way that skill is not always immediately apparent to the observer. Again sorry to bring up BW again, but for example, just by a round of muta harass you can tell roughly someone's rank on iccup, while in LoL, people 500 elo apart can have roughly the same cs in lane after 10min depending on matchup. All of this leads to what I believe to be an excessive amount of uninformed opinions about the game in general, from item builds to judgment of pro players. Uninformed opinions include straight up unknowingly uninformed opinions by the well intentioned to fanboy shittalk. While I have no duty or interest in defending every pro player from slander, I am however very often very annoyed by dumb comments posted on this forum that I have to skip while browsing. If you don't feel like pro players deserve some courtesy when being criticized for their play then I guess this post won't change anything. If you feel like your opinions are genuinely informed, please think it over again then post. This has nothing to do with criticizing progamers for anything outside of their gameplay. Here's basically where I'm coming from. I try to watch a lot of pro games, and do watch most NA tourney games and EU games, maybe I'm ridiculously bad at understanding streamed games, but I feel like I can't attribute a lot if any qualifies to 90% of players. People say that jiji is passive? If I never read that, I probably wouldn't have formed that opinion myself. When it comes to jungling, the role I main, I can safely estimate that I don't understand half of the jungling decisions made during laning phase of any tourney level game. All of which brings the question, how the fuck do other people do it? People analyze pro LoL games as if it's the NBA. When I read a tourney thread I honestly don't know where people get most of their assumptions from. So then there's the other possibility, that most people don't know what they're talking about, but rather say something rather than nothing. They recycle opinions from others, elaborate on blatant misconceptions, make bold but ambiguous judgments, etc.This is all true for commentators, but I really hope TLers do less of this than commentators. But unfortunately it doesn't seem like the case. I guess my only question then is what you would like the casters to do instead? They're attempting to analyze the game because people find that knowledge entertaining; it's their job to. I'll totally agree that it's our job as fans to A) Understand we don't know what the pros are doing or why, B) Attempt to answer that question ourselves in an intelligent manner before casting aspersions, C) Make our own calls on why these things are occurring and assess what we think their effect on the game was (good or bad), D) ONLY make commentary based on that (because we're on a forum; we're here to discuss), and E) Above all respect the players because they're the ones providing us with the opportunity to have this fun in the first place. It's just that casters have 5 seconds to do all of it. =/ Sucky, for sure, but there's not much that can be done. I guess it just gives us an additional incentive to make our own judgments. The caster's job is overall to entertain rather than inform: they can make (perhaps) decent guesses, but it's entirely probably that they'll be wrong. I think everything to be said about casters has been said but just going off of watching the LCS this past weekend, there were a lot of obvious observations that were either missed or ignored in favor of irrelevant information. To provide a simple commentary of anything, you have to have a professional's understanding. High school science books are written by professors rather than students. Also I think it's hilarious that people like montecristo gives "analysis" that's respected. The painfully obvious question is on what grounds does he assume to be an authority on LoL knowledge? Similar to riotjaws, to whoever else, etc. I thought kobe24 did a nice job even though I'm not sure if he still plays anymore and he hasn't played at a high level in forever. But what people respect about Kobe is the fact that he has played at a high level before and it brings a fresh perspective from someone who's succeeded at the top level before. They might not necessarily be the best players still, but being able to relay some of their experiences and apply that to the current era of League games is better than what we've got. Would you rather have Rivington (who knows absolutely nothing) or Kobe give you insight on what a player's decision making in game might be? It's what makes Jatt a better caster than all the OptimusToms and the Jaws and HatPersons. And since professional players won't ever commentate while trying to play professionally, the Jatts and Kobes of the world are what we're gonna have to live with because they're the best we've got. If that's what you're looking for at least.
I know that almost no one will agree with me but I actually prefer Kobe over Jatt. Both of them still play at high elo, both still have pro player contacts/friends that they talk to, and both were really damn good during their prime. Jatt was probably better and probably knows more about the game than Kobe but Kobe is honestly a lot more pleasant to listen to and fits in really well with everyone I've heard him duo cast with. Not to mention when shit hits the fan Kobe doesn't get very awkward or anything. During MLG's ARAM it was incredibly obvious that Jatt felt awkward and weird while Deman tried to cast it anyway. I think that Kobe would've gone more the way of Deman, even if he personally felt the ARAM was in poor taste. Or like at world's during technical issues Jatt didn't have much to say and let Deman do a lot of the gap filling whereas someone like Kobe I'd trust to keep the audience entertained a lot more than Jatt.
Both are super good. Jatt is probably better at analyzing and understanding the game. But Kobe's pretty good at that too and he's more of an entertainer imo.
Basically if Riot is up for hiring another caster it should be Kobe24 hands down no questions asked.
|
On January 16 2013 03:00 Mondeezy wrote:
Do you guys think competitive bans should be increased to 4 or 5 per team?
I kind of like seeing teams target ban certain players and adjust to the "OP" champs.
5 bans to lock out a player would be stupid as fuck. There's a reason people are known as GODS of certain champions, it makes it even more exciting to see them play those champions on the rare occassions they get to do so. Having 5 bans just makes it so much easier to target ban a team. Imagine CLG.EU. "We'll just ban Anivia, Lux, Irelia, Corki, and Leona." GG. ><
|
On January 16 2013 03:22 AsmodeusXI wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2013 03:14 WaveofShadow wrote:
Yeh I watched him and Categorist duo a bit yesterday; essentially his Draven has gotten pretty good, but he can play absolutely nothing else even close to that level currently.
On the subject of casters, while I do agree the ex-pros are the ones who will be giving the best analysis, that does not mean that those who study and learn just as much about the game despite not being able to play on that level can't do so.
(See MB/Neo/LoL subforum staff analysis)
None of these guys are pro players yet their post-game analysis and summaries are among the best around currently, and unrivaled.
I dunno bly, you and I definitely disagree on this point and probably will continue to do so. You make some valid points but I just don't agree that no one can commentate on high level play unless they themselves play at a high level.
(Note: I do not speak for my own casting and analysis ability, which is known to be shit.) I would hope that the prevailing sentiment should be instead "Don't commentate on high play unless you've done some serious thought about what's going on, and NEVER be an asshole about players regardless. Mistakes may LOOK really bad, but they're still way better than you." That makes the most sense to me.
That sentiment is so far beyond off.... mistakes are mistakes, no matter who commentates on it.
|
Jiji just missed a full Xerath combo on stream.
so bad l0l I no y they bench him
|
On January 16 2013 03:20 zulu_nation8 wrote:
i dont have the right to ban anyone from commentating, i'm just stating the opinion that if you don't play at a high level, you won't understand a lot of what is going on, I think that should be an obvious point. Studying/watching games is not the same as playing it. If you disagree with this point then only experience can change your perspective.
But even the most 1200 of an observer has true sight of the map (well, whoever's observing does but you catch my drift) so no matter if lower level players trying to understand certain decisions fail to do so, they know more in some aspects purely by having vision of everything. It's more of an aside of what you're talking about, but I felt the need to point out something completely obvious in my vain attempt to be correct.
|
On January 16 2013 03:36 -Zoda- wrote:
Jiji just missed a full Xerath combo on stream.
so bad l0l I no y they bench him
for several months now averaging 1000 viewers on stream, getting benched boom > 7k viewers.
|
On January 16 2013 03:41 AsnSensation wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2013 03:36 -Zoda- wrote:
Jiji just missed a full Xerath combo on stream.
so bad l0l I no y they bench him for several months now averaging 1000 viewers on stream, getting benched boom > 7k viewers.
It may help a bit. There is really nobody that usually has a big following streaming. Zekent with over 12k o.O
|
Honestly, I wonder how much of this is on the "team as a whole" and how much is on Hotshot making another power grab.
|
are there official numbers on stream viewers for the LCS yet?
|
On January 16 2013 03:22 AsmodeusXI wrote:
I would hope that the prevailing sentiment should be instead "Don't commentate on high play unless you've done some serious thought about what's going on, and NEVER be an asshole about players regardless. Mistakes may LOOK really bad, but they're still way better than you." That makes the most sense to me.
i disagree. i think commentary in gaming is largely unexplored and people just go by what they like.
i think there are a number of different styles that you can commentate in.
for play-by-play, your goal is to make the game more exciting for the listeners... building tension when exciting things happen, wincing when mistakes are made, openly wondering and questioning decisions that are not immediately obvious as to what they do.
for analysis, i don't think the goal is to break down what really happened on a strategical level. the real goal is to make the audience feel smart by somehow letting them deduce how a play happened. however, it DOES have to be correct.
my number one pet peeve is blatantly incorrect analysis. if you don't understand, don't analyze or put an opinion on it. just leave it alone and talk about stuff you do know.
|
Czech Republic11293 Posts
It's the access to true vision that makes decisions harder to understand, rather than the opposite. It's very easy to miss just how little vision teams have while adjusting their position to account for potential enemies that just aren't there. Access to true vision gives you no more ability to understand what is going on in the game.
I don't really know how much I am able to write about this subject coherently, but from my sc2 experience, the way I understood the game changed radically as my skill level increased. I watched like 5+ hours of starcraft2 streams back in the day, but some of the complex concepts that just weren't even mentioned completely eluded me until I got high enough on the ladder. I think that low level casters will inevitably miss complex concepts, not understand missed opportunities and accurately know how nerves/tilt affects players at high level.
But as I said, I don't really care lol, as long as the caster has a pleasant voice (go Deman!)
|
On January 16 2013 03:36 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2013 03:22 AsmodeusXI wrote:On January 16 2013 03:14 WaveofShadow wrote:
Yeh I watched him and Categorist duo a bit yesterday; essentially his Draven has gotten pretty good, but he can play absolutely nothing else even close to that level currently.
On the subject of casters, while I do agree the ex-pros are the ones who will be giving the best analysis, that does not mean that those who study and learn just as much about the game despite not being able to play on that level can't do so.
(See MB/Neo/LoL subforum staff analysis)
None of these guys are pro players yet their post-game analysis and summaries are among the best around currently, and unrivaled.
I dunno bly, you and I definitely disagree on this point and probably will continue to do so. You make some valid points but I just don't agree that no one can commentate on high level play unless they themselves play at a high level.
(Note: I do not speak for my own casting and analysis ability, which is known to be shit.) I would hope that the prevailing sentiment should be instead "Don't commentate on high play unless you've done some serious thought about what's going on, and NEVER be an asshole about players regardless. Mistakes may LOOK really bad, but they're still way better than you." That makes the most sense to me. That sentiment is so far beyond off.... mistakes are mistakes, no matter who commentates on it.
It's easy to say something was a mistake. To say why the player's play led up to that mistake, what they were trying to accomplish when the mistake happened, how that would have effected the game afterwards, etc. That's a lot harder to comment upon without the relevant knowledge.
|
Rhux Cris IWD APhro and Doublelift in one team now on Doublelift's stream, pretty stacked team for SoloQ and no positional conflicts since rhux is playing mid because he has to sub for NyJacky this weekend :D
On January 16 2013 03:49 gtrsrs wrote:
are there official numbers on stream viewers for the LCS yet?
not yet I think, twitch stream had about 100k on average though, pretty decent for a qualifier without the biggest teams.
|
On January 16 2013 03:10 Mondeezy wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2013 03:05 TheYango wrote:On January 16 2013 03:00 Mondeezy wrote:
Do you guys think competitive bans should be increased to 4 or 5 per team?
I kind of like seeing teams target ban certain players and adjust to the "OP" champs. This is going to spark a discussion of two-phase bans again, which we do not need to have again. Sadly I'm not familiar with that term. I was just curious as to if anyone else enjoyed the champ variety this past weekend as well as how the teams adjusted.
I enjoyed the qualifiers, Marn's Urgot composition especially. It illustrated the points I made a while ago regarding the state of AD carries very nicely, though I am remiss for failing to consider Urgot at the time of discussion.
On January 16 2013 03:51 Scip wrote:
It's the access to true vision that makes decisions harder to understand, rather than the opposite. It's very easy to miss just how little vision teams have while adjusting their position to account for potential enemies that just aren't there. Access to true vision gives you no more ability to understand what is going on in the game.
I don't really know how much I am able to write about this subject coherently, but from my sc2 experience, the way I understood the game changed radically as my skill level increased. I watched like 5+ hours of starcraft2 streams back in the day, but some of the complex concepts that just weren't even mentioned completely eluded me until I got high enough on the ladder. I think that low level casters will inevitably miss complex concepts, not understand missed opportunities and accurately know how nerves/tilt affects players at high level.
But as I said, I don't really care lol, as long as the caster has a pleasant voice (go Deman!)
Vision actually came up somewhat in last night's Mondays with Monte. During a lot of the initiations I limited vision to the team which was about to initiate in order to illustrate what they knew for certain, what they didn't know, and how that affected the decision.
It's definitely easy to scoff and thumb your nose at pro decisions when you have information they don't have.
|
On January 16 2013 03:48 Two_DoWn wrote:
Honestly, I wonder how much of this is on the "team as a whole" and how much is on Hotshot making another power grab.
What power is there to grab when everyone knows the team is yours. The competition is increasing more is on the line, and Jiji didn't even want to move in. Pretty sure everyone on CLG would have agreed with starting Link.
|
On January 16 2013 03:51 AsnSensation wrote:Rhux Cris IWD APhro and Doublelift in one team now on Doublelift's stream, pretty stacked team for SoloQ and no positional conflicts since rhux is playing mid because he has to sub for NyJacky this weekend :D Show nested quote +On January 16 2013 03:49 gtrsrs wrote:
are there official numbers on stream viewers for the LCS yet? not yet I think, twitch stream had about 100k on average though, pretty decent for a qualifier without the biggest teams.
it averaged at least 150k i think, that was the smallest number i ever saw any time i checked
highest i saw was just under 200k
if anyone gets official numbers, please let me know!
|
United States47024 Posts
On the issue of commentary, a similar discussion came up on the DotA forums around the time of TI2, and someone (I believe it was Kupon3ss) had what i considered a pretty important insight:
Analytical commentary is only useful to players that are slightly below the level of the commentator. The "best" commentary isn't always going to be the highest level analysis. A commentator analyzing the game at a level beyond the audience isn't going to engage the audience or really properly impart useful information to them.
It is possible for "low level" analytical commentary to be valuable and useful. Pro-level/high elo analysis is not useful to everyone. In fact, for the majority of the audience, high level analysis is not useful, relevant, or interesting.
The important thing is that the commentator has to recognize his ability, recognize his audience, and cast at an appropriate level. A commentator trying to analyze games beyond his own level of understanding is where people run into trouble.
|
Actually JiJi said in his Facebook post, that he was ready to move in for s3 ( kinda had to because of livematches in LA) but abandoned those plans obv because he's not a starter anymore.
I can imagine how it has to suck though to play for months with a team, while knowing that chauster, one of the most vocal members, is openly bashing you in his AMA. And hotshot seemed to blame alot on Jiji too, mostly because of his own insecurities about his play because he is basically facing the same problem from the public.
Honestly I have also been very critical of Jiji during the last months, but he actually showed some improvements during IPL 5.
I might not be as sad as others because I'm a Link fanboy but yeah seeing Jiji benched is kinda disappointing.
|
On January 16 2013 03:51 hasuprotoss wrote:Show nested quote +On January 16 2013 03:36 wei2coolman wrote:On January 16 2013 03:22 AsmodeusXI wrote:On January 16 2013 03:14 WaveofShadow wrote:
Yeh I watched him and Categorist duo a bit yesterday; essentially his Draven has gotten pretty good, but he can play absolutely nothing else even close to that level currently.
On the subject of casters, while I do agree the ex-pros are the ones who will be giving the best analysis, that does not mean that those who study and learn just as much about the game despite not being able to play on that level can't do so.
(See MB/Neo/LoL subforum staff analysis)
None of these guys are pro players yet their post-game analysis and summaries are among the best around currently, and unrivaled.
I dunno bly, you and I definitely disagree on this point and probably will continue to do so. You make some valid points but I just don't agree that no one can commentate on high level play unless they themselves play at a high level.
(Note: I do not speak for my own casting and analysis ability, which is known to be shit.) I would hope that the prevailing sentiment should be instead "Don't commentate on high play unless you've done some serious thought about what's going on, and NEVER be an asshole about players regardless. Mistakes may LOOK really bad, but they're still way better than you." That makes the most sense to me. That sentiment is so far beyond off.... mistakes are mistakes, no matter who commentates on it. It's easy to say something was a mistake. To say why the player's play led up to that mistake, what they were trying to accomplish when the mistake happened, how that would have effected the game afterwards, etc. That's a lot harder to comment upon without the relevant knowledge.
I'm sorry, but if that is what people are expecting in terms of having ex-pros doing the casting then that's ridiculous.
Essentially what it seems to be boiling down to is "unless you understand what is going on in that person's head, then you can't commentate on their play because you can't understand the situation they're in."
How the hell would anyone EVER be able to commentate on anything then? You don't see ex-pro football players giving such extreme context every time the quarterback tries a handoff that fails/gets fumbled rather than try for an easy short pass. No they give short analysis, talk about what THEY THINK the guy should have done, and that's it. He may be wrong, he may be right, but he certainly doesn't talk about the quarterback's entire past season and every other time he's ever tried to make a play like that and his team-mates thoughts, hopes and dreams.
There are too many unknowns at any point in time to ever have a perfect grasp of the situation. The ONLY person that can ever commentate on that is the player who makes the play themselves, post-game. Barring that, there are people who make it THEIR JOBS to GAIN an understanding of what high-level play is like at any sport, E- or otherwise, and as such they can commentate on it at a near-perfect level. Again, I agree that there are man y that come up short, and those who think they understand when they really don't, but the level of perfection that people seem to want from analysis casters on this forums appears absolutely ludicrous.
Edit: I'd also like to make very clear my position on 'scoffing' at pro players' decision-making. I may make a snide comment or confidently point out a mistake or what said pro-player 'should have done' but by no means do I think myself at their level or better than them. Yes, it is easy to call people out based on what little level of understanding I have, and I may be wrong, but for the most part as long as a certain level of respect/reverence is had for thsoe players I know to be much better than me, I don't see a problem with it.
A perfect example being calling Gasty of EA out on his Catalyst Evelynn build last night. Neither Soniv or I really understood the motivation behind such a decision, but that doesn't mean we can't commentate on it. Gasty himself then appeared in our thread later on and cleared it up himself. Perhaps that is a statement as to our ignorance more than anything, but I don't think in any way did it show our lack of respect for him as a player, oe who is vastly better than myself.
|
On January 16 2013 03:58 TheYango wrote:
Analytical commentary is only useful to players that are slightly below the level of the commentator. The "best" commentary isn't always going to be the highest level analysis. A commentator analyzing the game at a level beyond the audience isn't going to engage the audience or really properly impart useful information to them.
Isn't that the point of commentators and announcers? I watch football with a bunch of guys that played it in college and sometimes they just talk about stuff that the commentators didn't care to mention because I wouldn't have understood it anyways.
Anyone who has a good enough understanding of the game doesn't need commentary. BW was done in Korean and a ton of D- players were still able to figure out enough of what was going on to be entertained; sure we missed the really awesome things that really determined the outcome of the game that a better player would've picked up (upgrade timings etc) but even if someone pointed it out it wouldn't have made sense anyways because there's no intuitive understanding of the relevancy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v326/thefrog_/aaa-12.jpg)
